🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a growing number of nations are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader declaring that phones and networks are "robbing our youngsters' youth". Legislation could be passed soon.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media users. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the tools on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on lawmakers to approve a proposal lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in the Netherlands has recommended families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic motion supporting a ban for under-16s without parental consent is provided. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"A clear age barrier is a useful first step," stated a leading parliamentarian driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the administration has remained open to a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any action must be "based on robust data".

Previously, interest gathered behind a legislative effort to enact controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration committed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after encountering harmful online content contends that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to design tools that are appropriate and suitable for minors," said a influential peer.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

In the United States, regulation is mostly occurring at the regional level due to country-wide inaction.

• Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a measure barring under-14s from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law limiting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with extra access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced measures mandating guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from various politicians to copy Australia's lead, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Outside of these regions, additional states are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, international organizations adopt a more nuanced tone. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The body highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

While this global discussion continues, the steps of the Australian government and its followers show that policymakers internationally are increasingly prepared to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.